Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In speaking on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Savings Fund Special Account Bill 2016, I say from the outset I support and endorse the remarks of the member for Jagajaga when she spoke on this bill on 15 February and I speak in support of the amendments that she moved on the day.

For the past four years since this government has been in government and indeed even before that, it was clear to me that the government was never truly committed to the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It publicly said it was but, if you look at the actions of the government and when it was in opposition, there was no genuine commitment to the scheme from my observations. Despite the government's claim of support for the scheme and empathy for people with a disability, the NDIS is only being rolled out today because of Labor, just as it has always been Labor that has led social reform in Australia. It is because of the Leader of the Opposition and because of the member for Jagajaga that the NDIS is becoming a reality for Australians across the country.

Only people with a serious disability and their caring family members would fully understand the 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week, 52-weeks-of-the-year, year-in-and-year-out disadvantage, difficulties, sacrifices and hardships that they endure. If that is not enough, there are ongoing lifetime financial costs including medication, medical devices, loss of income, home modifications, transport costs and so on—costs which to date they have had little support to try and meet. In a prosperous country that Australia is, there is no justification for fellow Australians continuing to endure such disadvantage and such hardship. The NDIS was needed, it was long overdue, and a Labor government made it a reality.

Now the Turnbull government wants to reneg on delivering the NDIS in full with its spin lines that Labor did not fully fund the program. That is a dishonest claim from a government that has lost control of its budget, lost control of its finances and is looking for a way out. We know that the budget deficit for the 2016-17 year is heading towards $37 billion in the red. Even more despicable is that the Turnbull government now wants to trade support for one group of vulnerable Australians—that is, people with a disability—against other vulnerable Australians including pensioners, the unemployed and students. Claims that Labor had not fully funded the NDIS have been clearly shown to be false by the member for Jagajaga. Labor had clearly defined a ten-year funding proposal for the NDIS which included a 0.5 per cent increase in the Medicare levy, reforms to retirement incomes, private health insurance rebate reforms, the phase out of the net medical expense tax offset and other long-term savings proposals as well. In addition to that, we know that the state and territory governments will also contribute almost half the cost towards the scheme.

But if government members believe the minister's claim that the scheme was not fully funded then I remind them that they have now been in government for almost four years. If the government was committed to the NDIS and it really believed its funding spin, it has had four years to find the funds. This legislation, which simply establishes a NDIS savings special fund, is just another attempt by the Turnbull government to delay the full funding and roll out of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Another special account is not required because the reality is a special account already exists. It was set up by Labor. It is called the DisabilityCare Australia Fund, which is where increased Medicare levy funds go.

Sadly the victims of the Turnbull government's dishonesty and spin are again the most vulnerable Australians, people with a disability, who are being used as pawns and left with uncertainty. It is true that the NDIS has transformed the lives of those people who can now access the NDIS, and I have heard some truly amazing stories in respect of that. However, others are still waiting. For them, every week that access is delayed is another week of hardship that they endure.

Rather than play politics with the lives of vulnerable Australians, the government could fix its budget mess by adopting Labor budget savings measures. It could adopt Labor's negative gearing policy, which alone would save the government around $32 billion over the next 10 years. And it could drop its unnecessary $50 billion company tax cuts, which hand out tens of billions of dollars to already very profitable big businesses. That is what most Australians would expect the government to do. But blinded by its ideology, the Turnbull government is prepared to sacrifice struggling families in order to keep big business and billionaires on side. The government's claim that the $50 billion company tax cuts will create more jobs and growth simply does not withstand scrutiny. Many of those very companies that will benefit from the $50 billion in tax cuts are already making billions of dollars in profits each year and they are all continuing to cut jobs. Inequality in this country is widening and the big corporates are getting wealthier while, for struggling Australians, life gets tougher.

As the Leader of the Opposition highlighted today in question time, today's national accounts confirm that corporate profits had their biggest increase in 40 years while wages and salaries had their largest fall in over 20 years.

A report by the Australia Institute released very recently highlights that Australia's richest 10 people—the richest 10 people, not the richest 10 per cent of Australians—own as much in financial assets as the bottom 20 per cent of Australians. Those 10 richest Australians own as much as nearly four million Australians own at the lowest end. Using another comparison, Australia's top 20 per cent own 62 per cent of the wealth, whilst the bottom 20 per cent own just 0.9 per cent.

Those figures paint a very clear picture. Where are the trickle-down economics by which this government justifies its $50 billion tax cuts to big business? If they were there, the gap would be narrowing, not widening, but the figures tell a different story. That is why the $50 billion in tax cuts to big business cannot be justified when the government is asking people such as those with a disability to forgo the funding they need because the government needs it to fund its cuts for big business, a sector that does not need them.

In question time two weeks ago, the Prime Minister was twice asked about funding the NDIS. After some six minutes of hysterical ranting, the Prime Minister failed to reassure families that NDIS funding would be delivered in full and on time. Any person waiting for NDIS support does not want to hear the Prime Minister playing a blame game with the issue, talking about budget shortfalls or talking about the NDIS not being fully funded. They just want reassurance that the NDIS will be funded in full and on time. They do not want to hear threats that the NDIS funding is contingent on cuts to other family payments, as outlined in the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Omnibus Savings and Child Care Reform) Bill that was debated in the House only yesterday.

On 16 February, the minister advised the House that, by the end of June 2016, 63,482 people were on the NDIS. By the end of 2019-20, all eligible people—that is, around 460,000—will be on the NDIS, at an annual cost of $22 billion, of which the Commonwealth government will have to find $11.1 billion. The minister claims that, based on known income streams, the $11.1 billion figure will leave a $4.1 billion shortfall. That is down from a previous figure of $4.4 billion. In any case, the minister claims there will be a $4 billion plus shortfall, hence the government's attempts to tie NDIS funding to welfare cuts, as it has been endeavouring to do ever since it has been in office—in other words, make one group of Australians pay for another group's needs.

It seems, though, that the government is running into difficulties getting some of its proposals through. It is running into difficulties because Australians understand unfairness when they see it, as do members in this place. That is why members of the Labor Party and crossbench members in this House are opposing some of those measures. They understand that it is simply not fair to make one vulnerable group of Australians pay for another group's needs. Where does that leave the rollout of the NDIS if the government's proposed cuts to pensions, family payments, unemployment payments and student payments do not get through?

That brings me to this bill. It is not the government's bookkeeping diversions that will provide certainty to people waiting to get on the NDIS; it is a commitment to the funding required. Of course, we know the government could also fund the scheme by adopting some of the policies that Labor has put forward that I referred to earlier. But it refuses to do that, again for its own blind, ideological reasons. The government knows full well that some of the measures that it continues to fund are unfair and unjust when contrasted with the needs of people with a disability.

The government claims that there is a $4.1 billion shortfall in the funding of the NDIS. In addition to playing one group of vulnerable Australians off against another in order to find the funds, it is of equal concern that it is just as likely that the government will play one group of people with a disability off against another. That truly concerns me, because what it really means is not only that the program will not be rolled out as expected and as proposed by Labor but also that the government, in order to fund one category of recipients, may well do that by cutting funding to another.

There is still uncertainty about the inclusion of some categories of need in the scheme, and, if they are included, under what conditions that will be. For example, childhood hearing services are currently being transitioned into the NDIS. However, there is uncertainty about the funding framework and the services that will be available. There are fears that hearing-impaired children may be even worse off under the NDIS compared with the funding support that they are currently eligible for. The unresolved issues relate to eligibility criteria, scope of services, duration of services, referral arrangements and the funding itself.

Mr Deputy Speaker Georganas, as you would know well as deputy chair of the standing committee on health, which is currently running an inquiry on hearing issues, early diagnosis and treatment of hearing impairment is crucial to a child's future. Any attempt to cut NDIS costs by diluting the hearing services required by children will come at the expense of those children and their families. Children's hearing services would not be the only area of disability funding that is still unresolved and leaving people with uncertainty. Indeed, I wonder what other sneaky measures the government is considering in order to try and find funds for the National Disability Insurance Scheme rollout. We will watch with interest what happens in the months and years ahead.

As the member for Jagajaga quite rightly pointed out, this is simply another stunt by the government so it can pretend that, if there is a problem with the rollout of the NDIS, it is all Labor's fault because it was not fully funded. Nothing could be further from the truth. Labor funded it not only to the year 2020, which is when the minister claims the full rollout for 460,000 people will be in place; Labor fully funded it for a 10-year period. Setting up another account is not what is required. What is required is a commitment from this government.

Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am delighted that the National Disability Insurance Scheme is coming to the Illawarra on 1 July 2017. It was introduced into the Southern Highlands area of my electorate much earlier but in the Illawarra it will be providing services to people with disabilities and their families from 1 July this year. That is a good thing. When Labor developed the NDIS, we envisaged a game-changing approach to receiving the services and equipment needed by people living with a disability to enable them to live their lives to their absolute fullest.

The NDIS was designed to enable people living with disability to participate more in society—at school, work and the community. They shouldn't need to go from charity to charity for the essential, life-changing equipment that they need or for the basic care to fulfil functions that the rest of us take for granted. This is the NDIS people are excited about coming to the Illawarra, and I hope that it is real.

I have mentioned the fact that it is already in the Southern Highlands part of my electorate. I would like to give a shout out to Bruce Munford from Moss Vale. He is a bit of a character and he is a client of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. He is a bit of local celebrity. I went into bat for Bruce a few months ago after initial concerns that he had with his plan under the NDIS. I am very pleased to say that that has now been resolved after NDIS staff listened to the concerns that we raised with them and sorted them out very quickly. In that process Bruce spoke out about the challenges that he faces with multiple sclerosis, and the assistance he needs to fulfil tasks we all take for granted every day just to get by. His condition will steadily and inevitably get worse. Without the NDIS, Bruce believes he would be left to bang on the doors of charity for assistance. He thought he might have to live in an institution and not be able to live with his wife in the house he has lived in for many years in the close company and his family.

The NDIS has given him more flexibility, more autonomy and more transparency with the services that he needs, but he is constantly worried, and for good reason, that the government is trying to avoid providing a properly funded service—that they are trying to reduce their own responsibilities under the scheme. I'm going to use Bruce's exact words here:

I'm worried the Government are increasingly divesting themselves from the original plan for NDIS that Julia Gillard and Labor Government laid out.

Bruce, once again, has hit the nail on the head.

If the government will not listen to us and if the government will not listen to disability groups, then perhaps they will listen to the people the NDIS was originally designed to benefit. While there are a lot of positive things we can say about the NDIS, I am sad to say this bill is part of a clumsy package of legislation which is designed to hold the National Disability Insurance Scheme to ransom for a range of other egregious cuts that the Australian people have already rejected, not once but in some cases twice. We are not going to let them get away with it. We think that the whole show is a bit of a smokescreen and it is not necessary. I will go on to explain why it is unnecessary.

I want to start, however, by making something very clear: the National Disability Insurance Scheme is fully funded. The NDIS, which was designed, funded and introduced by Labor, is being introduced and delivered on time and within budget. This bill is nothing more than a distraction for the cuts that have been debated at great length in other bills that were before the house earlier today. Australians are simply not going to stand for it. In the 2013-14 budget, Labor clearly set out how the NDIS was going to be funded for 10 years—well past the transition to the full scheme and well beyond the forward estimates. This included reforms to the private health insurance and the very expensive private health insurance rebate, and some of those savings were diverted towards the funds for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. There were also reforms to retirement incomes and the phase-out of the net medical expenses tax offset, as well as a whole range of other long-term savings proposals. In addition to this, the Medicare levy was also increased by 0.5 percentage points to 2 per cent. Normally a measure like that would be controversial, but I am quite certain of the fact that there was bipartisan support across the House and throughout the community at large; and this is evidence of the deep-seated community support for the scheme to which the additional Medicare levy went to fund.

These measures, combined with the contributions from state and territory governments, covered the cost of the NDIS for ten years. At the risk of labouring the point, I will say again: the NDIS is fully funded. The government knows this. And why do we know? Because they voted for almost every single one of those savings measures.

The minister's own department proved the NDIS is fully funded.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And they never made the point that it wasn't.

Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am reminded by the honourable member that they never contradicted the fact that it was not. I thank the member for Blair for reminding me of that. This The Department of Social Services has outlined the funding sources for the NDIS, including $4.4 million from consolidated revenue. That is trivial in the overall scheme of things, but the point I make is that the department has confirmed it and the government has never contradicted what the department has said. The government continues to refer to this as a 'shortfall', but consolidated revenue is used to fund government expenditure. That is what it is there for; that is what it is consolidated for. That is what the majority of government programs are funded from and how they are funded, and this has already been confirmed by the department. So why the amnesia from the government? Why the backflip? We can draw no conclusion other than it is some ruse or some political stunt, perhaps to fill the agenda papers of parliament because the government does not really have much else on the agenda for us to deal with. So we are going to oppose the bill. I should have said that at the outset: we are going to oppose the bill.

Labor also objects to the way that this matter has been brought before the House. As I said before, it is an attempt by the government to hold the parliament to ransom and hold the NDIS to ransom for a range of other egregious savings measures. There is already a special account. I also want to make this point: the bill would establish a special account, but we say we do not need a special account and I will explain why. Labor already set one up. We already set up a special account: the DisabilityCare Australia Fund. This fund is credited with the additional revenue stream from the increase in the Medicare levy. This means that, if this bill succeeds, we will have two special accounts: the one set up under Labor and the one that the government is attempting to establish. We say it is not necessary. The coalition government's priorities and motives therefore must be questioned. Again, we say this bill is nothing more than a political stunt to mislead the public.

If the government will not listen to the very sound and reasoned arguments of Labor members and some of the Independents, perhaps they will listen to the disability groups who have been very outspoken on their views about this provision. I quote Peter Davidson from the Australian Council of Social Services. He said:

It is not obvious why this new fund is needed. Its purpose, apart from the generic one of funding the NDIS, is not clear and we don't believe it should be supported in its present form.

That is very polite language from Peter Davidson of ACOSS, but it is very clear in that comment that they cannot see the purpose and they are suspicious. Those thoughts are echoed by Alan Blackwood who represents the Young People in Nursing Homes National Alliance. He said:

The Alliance does not support the Savings Fund as constructed in the bill … the notion of a funding shortfall portrayed in the bill and Ministers speech—

his second reading speech—

is actually concerning and—

what is more—

perplexing.

Those are the words of Alan Blackwood from the Young People in Nursing Homes National Alliance.

Stephanie Gotlib is from Children and Young People with Disability Australia, an organisation that also objects. She said:

It is believed that the creation of this Special Account … places essential disability services and supports as non-core business of the Australian Government, with their full funding being dependent on other budget savings measures identified by the Government of the day.

The force of those three submissions is simply this: why are people with disability being treated differently, and why we are constructing a program for people with disability in a completely different way to the way we deal with other programs in both the Human Services and the Health portfolios and a whole range of other government programs? Why are we treating people with disability differently? That is a very good question to which the government has no answer.

Labor referred this bill to a Senate inquiry so we can better understand what the government is attempting to achieve in establishing an account. As was clear from the inquiry, it is nothing more than a thinly veiled attack on the people who rely on the scheme to provide services. We are not going to accept it. The government has not made a case for the establishment of the fund. As the disability groups, advocates and people who gave evidence to the Senate inquiry made clear, there is no case for it, but there is ample reason for Australians and the Australian Labor Party to be incredibly suspicious about what the government's true position is. We reject the bill.

Matt Thistlethwaite (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like my colleagues, I speak in opposition to this bill, quite simply because it is not needed. It is nothing more than a cheap and sick political stunt that is designed to justify cuts to other social services programs on the basis of providing ongoing funding for what is a very important reform, the National Disability Insurance Scheme. We all know the importance of looking after people with disabilities. Labor established the NDIS, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, in the 2013-14 budget after an extensive period of consultation that was undertaken predominantly by the now Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, when he was Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services in the Rudd government. He travelled around the country, undertook extensive consultation with disability service providers, families, carers and, of course, Australians living with disabilities. What he found was that, quite alarmingly, in modern Australia people living with a disability are still second-class citizens. They are not getting the same level of support and access to rewarding and fulfilling lives and the opportunity to contribute to our economy that other Australians are enjoying. This finding was backed by a very thorough investigation and report from the Productivity Commission which looked at this issue and recommended to government that the National Disability Insurance Scheme be established. They did that on the basis of looking at the productivity benefits that would flow to Australia if we did establish the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and the Productivity Commission quite rightly found that we were holding back Australia's productivity and potential increases in GDP and incomes by not providing people with disabilities with the opportunity to live rewarding and fulfilling lives, undertake further education and training, be involved in the workforce, and ensure that they had connected and fulfilling lives that would ultimately not only improve their wellbeing and the social wellbeing of communities but grow our economy. It was on that basis that the Leader of the Opposition made a recommendation to government, cabinet supported it and the NDIS was announced in 2013.

As I said, when Labor announced it, we ensured that this important reform was fully funded in the 2013-14 budget, and it is only of late—really since the Abbott government was elected—that the questions the conservatives have thrown at this fund and this program have begun to surface. Firstly, then Prime Minister Abbott asked the commission of inquiry to look at not only this issue but government services more generally. The commission of inquiry recommended that additional funding was needed. Since then, we have had a conga line of conservatives lining up to criticise the NDIS, and to claim that the process is not funded, that we cannot afford this important reform and that there is a need for this special account to offset funding and offset programs in other areas, and to try and water down social services more generally. Well, as the Labor members have pointed out on several occasions in this parliament, through the Senate inquiry that was conducted into this reform—as have, indeed, many of the organisations that work in this space—this is simply not true. It is not true. And it is wilfully irresponsible for the conservatives, for the Abbott-Turnbull government representatives and for others who rail against this policy to claim that it is not funded, because it is fully funded and that was outlined in the 2013 budget.

In that budget we announced the 0.5 per cent increase in the Medicare levy from 1.5 per cent to two per cent, to go into a special fund called DisabilityCare Australia that would, over the course of five years, be funded to the tune of $20.4 billion from 2014-15 to 2018-19. Some of that money was going to funding the NDIS. Admittedly, those funds would not cover all of the cost; we realised that when the fund was established. But we then found further savings measures in that particular budget over the course of the ensuing decade, and those other savings measures included a plan to ensure that there were reforms to the private health insurance rebate totalling $6.5 billion in value, $6 billion in retirement incomes reforms, and $20.6 billion in other long-term savings measures, and those other long-term savings measures included: changes to tax concessions for fringe benefits, changes to tax concessions for net medical expenses, changes to indexation of tobacco excises and increases to import processing charges. So there they are in black and white in the budget: fully funded, fully costed, signed off by Treasury, I might add, at the time, and never disputed when they were originally put into the 2013-14 budget. This is a point that was recently made very well by the Senate inquiry that looked into this bill that we are debating here today in the Labor members' dissenting report. So the claim that the NDIS is not fully funded is nothing more than rubbish and a concerted campaign from many conservatives who do not believe in the ideal of an NDIS and many commentators who want to see it underwritten and under-managed to ensure that it is never fully implemented.

There are other concerns that have been raised with this particular bill—namely, the establishment of a special account. Quite simply, there is no need for the establishment of this special account that this bill seeks to undertake. The reason is that there is already a special account that was established to fund the NDIS, and I mentioned that special account earlier—the DisabilityCare Australia fund that was established by Labor, which was receiving the funds from the increase in the Medicare levy. So the effect of this bill is to establish another special fund. And what is the reason? Simply so that the Turnbull government can claim that they need to make savings to other social security measures—most namely, cuts to pensions, cuts to benefits for unemployed people, cuts to family payments and cuts to paid parental leave. They are using this particular fund to justify cuts to social services in other areas. It represents this government's twisted priorities when it comes to budget savings measures and trying to increase revenue to ensure that our fiscal position is more sustainable in the future because, once again, they are attacking the most vulnerable and weak in our society and letting off the big end of town with their $50 billion corporate tax cut. Well, Labor says that that is not on. And we have called this for what it is: nothing more than a ruse and a sick attempt to divert attention and to try to claim that the NDIS is not fully funded so that they can make cuts elsewhere in the budget.

These are concerns that have all been expressed by stakeholders who work in this area. In the Senate inquiry that was undertaken into this bill over recent months, those concerns were enunciated by many of the people and providers that work in this area—particularly the concerns about the establishment of a special fund. Peter Davidson from ACOSS, in giving evidence to the inquiry looking at this bill, said:

… it is not obvious why this new fund is needed. Its purpose, apart from the generic one of funding the NDIS, is not clear, and we do not believe it should be supported in its present form.

Also Stephanie Gotlib from Children and Young People with Disability Australia said:

It is believed that the creation of this special account … places essential disability services and support as non-core business of the Australian government, with their full funding being dependent on other budget-saving measures identified by the government of the day.

Stephanie says it perfectly. The community and stakeholders have seen what is behind this bill and have called it for what it is. It is just another attempt by this government to cut social services.

There is also a concern regarding the minister's discretion. The minister will be solely responsible for policy and management of this fund. Again, this is a concern that has been expressed by stakeholders regarding the drafting of the bill and the management of this fund. In their submission, ACOSS said:

This has rightly caused concern amongst the disability sector, as a core part of the NDIS is the independent management of Commonwealth and State government funds by the NDIA. In addition, the funding cap sends a message that funding for the NDIS could be restricted, and consequently services and supports made available under the scheme would be limited.

That is the view of people who work in this industry and the stakeholders who are involved with this. They know what is going on here, and they see through what the government is doing in establishing this fund. The fund is not needed, because we already have a special fund for the NDIS. That was established by Labor in 2013-14.

The real reason that the government are doing is that they are seeking to make cuts to other social security measures in the budget to justify this fund, and those cuts will come to people on unemployment benefits, to pensioners, to families and to working mothers in this country—and that is wrong. It is wrong not only because of the substance of those cuts involved but also because they are attempting to mislead the public into believing that the NDIS is not fully funded—therefore needing this special fund and needing to make those cuts in other areas. That is downright deceitful. This fund is not needed, because the NDIS was fully funded by the Labor government in the 2013-14 budget.

The NDIS is a very necessary reform—something that we all understand will improve the lives of people in Australia living with disability. It will ensure that they can live rewarding and fulfilling lives. It will ensure that they can contribute to their communities and enhance their educational and productive capacity, which will end up growing our economy. It is a very important reform and it should not be undermined by deceitful acts such as this from this government, and I urge everyone to vote against this bill.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in strong opposition to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Savings Fund Special Account Bill 2016. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is the most ambitious and far-reaching social policy reform in Australia since Medicare. It recognises that disability can affect anyone, and all Australians should have access to support to live fulfilling and productive lives.

I have watched the growth of the NDIS since its earliest days, as my electorate of Newcastle was fortunate to be one of the national trial sites in this country, and it was one of the largest and most complex of the trial sites back in 2014. In this time, I have seen firsthand the transformational power of this landmark scheme on the lives of participants and their families. For the first time in our history, people with disability are able to make the decisions about the support they receive and how they receive it. In addition the NDIS will eventually return billions to the budget and create more jobs, because it gives people with a disability the ability to participate more actively in their communities and in the workforce.

So it is not surprising that, when the former Labor government established the NDIS in 2013, it enjoyed strong bipartisan support. Liberal and National members of parliament gave their heartfelt endorsement in this place and in their communities. People with a disability felt confident that this parliament had this strong bipartisan support and the scheme was protected from usual partisan politics that we see in this chamber. But, regretfully, we started to hear very different messages from those opposite once they moved onto the government benches. Conservative commentary started to take on a negative tone, as those opposite began to talk down the scheme and raise doubt about its future funding certainty.

Since 2014, we have sadly witnessed a growing stream of denigrating remarks, backgrounders and political manoeuvres from this government that can only be described as being deliberately designed to undermine this critical reform. If you want to see this strategy in action, you only need to look at the recent article in The Australian last month, which claimed serious blowouts in the NDIS and placed a question mark over its future funding. This assertion is not new; in fact, government members have been shopping it around in the media for some years now. But, contrary to the popular saying, telling a lie often enough still does not make it true. In fact, this myth was comprehensively shot down in Senate estimates on 11 February last year. Here, the government's own official told senators, and I quote:

There have been many, many inaccurate news reports about cost blowouts in the NDIS, and they are all inaccurate ... I can say on the record that the NDIS is tracking to budget.

That is what the official said in Senate estimates. Yet here we are almost exactly a year later and the Turnbull government is still trying to mislead Australians about the NDIS.

The second tactic the Turnbull government likes to use to denigrate the NDIS is to claim that it was never funded properly to begin with. And that is exactly what the bill before us today is about. It is the legislative attempt to create uncertainty about the viability of the NDIS into the future. By proposing the need for a 'special fund', Mr Turnbull is trying to legitimise the assertion that the NDIS was never funded properly. This claim is blatantly and demonstrably untrue. Let us be clear: this bill is the solution to a problem that does not exist outside the government's own confections. It is a political stunt designed to support the government's agenda of destabilising the NDIS.

Labor understands that people with disability, their families and carers deserve funding certainty on the NDIS. That is precisely why we fully funded it for 10 years. We did this by making difficult choices. The increase in the Medicare levy, combined with contributions from state and territory governments and other savings measures such as $6.5 billion in reforms to the private health insurance rebate, $6 billion in retirement income reforms and $20.6 billion in other long-term savings, ensured that the NDIS would be properly funded for 10 years. For anyone interested in seeing exactly where the savings came from, I recommend looking at the chart that Treasury tabled in the June 2013 estimates. It outlines very clearly where the savings were made and how the NDIS was funded. Coalition members would already be aware of the savings that were secured because they voted for almost every single measure. They agreed that they would fund the NDIS then. So why are they trying to cast doubt on this important funding commitment now? The fact that the Turnbull government continues to try to mislead the public is of grave concern to Labor. More importantly, it is of grave concern to the people in the disability sector, the people who rely on the NDIS and their loved ones. Every time the government starts talking about underfunding, I get calls and emails from people in my community and beyond who fear this could be the beginning of the end for this vital landmark initiative. The NDIS should be a vital government responsibility, just like health and education. By establishing a special account, the government sends a clear signal that it somehow sees disability support as outside of, or separate from, its core responsibilities.

Last year, the Senate held an inquiry into this bill. In its submission, the Department of Social Services outlined the funding sources for the NDIS, and the scheme includes some funding from consolidated revenue. While the government disingenuously refers to this as a 'shortfall', department officials confirmed to the inquiry that consolidated revenue is used to fund government expenditure in accordance with its priorities. The fact that the government is unwilling to use this money for the NDIS demonstrates clear problems with its priorities. Key disability groups have recognised that the construction of a special account as outlined in this bill is little more than a cynical, politically motivated exercise. In this regard, Peter Davidson from ACOSS said:

… it is not obvious why this new fund is needed. Its purpose, apart from the generic one of funding the NDIS, is not clear and we do not believe it should be supported in its present form.

Stephanie Gotlib from Children and Young People with Disability Australia warned that the creation of a special account would devalue disability support, saying:

It is believed that the creation of this special account … places essential disability services and support as non-core business of the Australian government, with their full funding being dependent on other budget-saving measures identified by the government of the day.

Alan Blackwood from the Young People in Nursing Homes National Alliance had similar concerns, saying:

… the alliance does not support the savings fund as constructed in the bill.

…   …   …

… the notion of a funding shortfall, portrayed in the bill and the minister's speech is, actually, concerning and perplexing.

Another issue that was cited by many of the stakeholders who participated in the Senate inquiry was the inclusion of ministerial discretion in relation to the fund, as this legislation gives the minister sole responsibility for the management of the account. In its submission, the Australian Council of Social Service, or ACOSS, clearly articulated how this discretion could weaken the independence of the NDIS. The submission states:

The Minister for Social Services will be solely responsible for policy and management of the fund, which gives greater control to the Commonwealth and removes independence from the management of part of the Scheme's funding base. This has rightly caused concern amongst the disability sector, as a core part of the NDIS is the independent management of Commonwealth and State government funds by the NDIA.

Labor is extremely apprehensive about how this discretion might be employed by the government given its long history of trying to frustrate, denigrate and raise doubts about this vital scheme. Ultimately, this goes to a question of trust and, regrettably, the Turnbull government has shown too many times that it cannot be trusted to do the right thing when it comes to the NDIS.

This was further reinforced only last month, when the government disgracefully, and completely arbitrarily, linked its cruel cuts to families, pensioners and young people with the NDIS funding. Shamefully, it threatened to hold the NDIS to ransom unless this parliament passed its vicious omnibus bill, which is full of zombie cuts that have been revived from Tony Abbott's toxic 2014 budget. This confirms that the government is embarking on an appalling and blatantly political strategy to destabilise the NDIS and pit Australians against each other. I can think of no more disgraceful act a government could carry out on its citizens. Trying to play off people with disabilities against pensioners, families, jobseekers and students is appalling and something we should be utterly ashamed of. At the same time, it created enormous and unnecessary anxiety for many, many thousands of Australians about the future funding of the NDIS. Mr Turnbull should, as I said, be utterly ashamed of this attempt to link the future of the NDIS with support—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Newcastle needs to refer to members by their correct titles.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

for cruel cuts to vulnerable Australians. I take your point, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister should be utterly ashamed of this attempt to link the future of the NDIS with support for cruel cuts to vulnerable Australians. This government's willingness to use one of the most important generational reforms this country has ever seen as a pawn in its vicious game is proof positive that it simply cannot be trusted. I will take the opportunity to speak in continuation when the debate is resumed, Mr Speaker.